1. 9/17/2003 1LRM Spec Review LRM Material and Process Spec Review Cindy Cole Certification Manager The Lancair Company

2. 9/17/2003 2LRM Spec Review General We don’t perform LRM at Lancair, but we have investigated it. We do perform structural wet layup. We don’t perform LRM at Lancair, but we have investigated it. We do perform structural wet layup. Most comments are picky details Most comments are picky details Some are based on our ACO’s requirements for material database reports Some are based on our ACO’s requirements for material database reports

3. 9/17/2003 3LRM Spec Review Terminology I was very confused on the term ‘batch acceptance.’ Spec must differentiate: I was very confused on the term ‘batch acceptance.’ Spec must differentiate: Supplier Quality Assurance performed by the fiber manufacturer Supplier Quality Assurance performed by the fiber manufacturer Receiving tests performed by fabric manufacturer Receiving tests performed by fabric manufacturer Quality assurance tests performed by the material manufacturer (on mixed resin batches and fabrics) Quality assurance tests performed by the material manufacturer (on mixed resin batches and fabrics) Receiving tests performed by the end-user (aka part producer) on resin and fabric Receiving tests performed by the end-user (aka part producer) on resin and fabric Tests performed by the end-user as in-process verification Tests performed by the end-user as in-process verification

4. 9/17/2003 4LRM Spec Review Terminology To me ‘acceptance’ should indicate ‘when it comes in the door.’ I believe the term ‘quality assurance’ should be used in place of ‘acceptance’ testing by the base material manufacturers after they have made their product. To me ‘acceptance’ should indicate ‘when it comes in the door.’ I believe the term ‘quality assurance’ should be used in place of ‘acceptance’ testing by the base material manufacturers after they have made their product. The term “Equivalence” is used for different things. Section 4.3 of Material Spec is “Equivalency Baseline Enhancement.” This should be retitled “Database Enhancement” or something similar to distinguish it from equivalence testing performed by an end-user to show they can use properties developed by the material supplier. The term “Equivalence” is used for different things. Section 4.3 of Material Spec is “Equivalency Baseline Enhancement.” This should be retitled “Database Enhancement” or something similar to distinguish it from equivalence testing performed by an end-user to show they can use properties developed by the material supplier. The Glossary should include terms like Batch, Batch Acceptance, Equivalence, etc., that may be defined in the text of the document, but should be defined in the glossary as well. The Glossary should include terms like Batch, Batch Acceptance, Equivalence, etc., that may be defined in the text of the document, but should be defined in the glossary as well.

5. 9/17/2003 5LRM Spec Review Material Specification, LRM Processes and Materials Figure 2.1 (1.1 in the process specification) flow chart should not have a line between the Fiber Reception/Storage and Resin Mixing, nor between the Resin Reception/Storage and Preform Assembly (unless you consider Tackifiers to be Resin). Figure 2.1 (1.1 in the process specification) flow chart should not have a line between the Fiber Reception/Storage and Resin Mixing, nor between the Resin Reception/Storage and Preform Assembly (unless you consider Tackifiers to be Resin).

6. 9/17/2003 6LRM Spec Review Material Specification, LRM Processes and Materials Section 2.2 lists materials that are typically not controlled by their own material specification, but rather by a qualified products list. We have had to put mold release agents into a material specification which include receiving inspection testing. Not sure what is meant by ‘adhesives’ in this section. Section 2.2 lists materials that are typically not controlled by their own material specification, but rather by a qualified products list. We have had to put mold release agents into a material specification which include receiving inspection testing. Not sure what is meant by ‘adhesives’ in this section. Figure 3 shows tackified fabric as part of the material procurement spec. I would have expected this to be part of the material acceptance spec. Materials aren’t purchased in preforms, are they? Figure 3 shows tackified fabric as part of the material procurement spec. I would have expected this to be part of the material acceptance spec. Materials aren’t purchased in preforms, are they?

7. 9/17/2003 7LRM Spec Review Material Specification, Development of Material Controls Section 3.3, titled Part Producer Responsibilities for Material use in Structural Design, should include more information on other tests for qualification of a material (lightning protection, compatibility with secondary adhesives, etc.) Section 3.3, titled Part Producer Responsibilities for Material use in Structural Design, should include more information on other tests for qualification of a material (lightning protection, compatibility with secondary adhesives, etc.) Our ACO has requested that the material database reports have specific wording regarding the limitations of the data. If we want to work that into the specification, this may be the place to do it. Our ACO has requested that the material database reports have specific wording regarding the limitations of the data. If we want to work that into the specification, this may be the place to do it. This report provides material data that may be used in Part 23 aircraft design, including B-Basis values that meet the requirements of 23.613 taking into account environmental factors per 23.603. This report provides material data that may be used in Part 23 aircraft design, including B-Basis values that meet the requirements of 23.613 taking into account environmental factors per 23.603.

8. 9/17/2003 8LRM Spec Review Material Specification, Development of Material Controls Section 3.3 recommends “that the end-user perform the purchaser batch acceptance tests on panels cured using the material supplier’s baseline cure process.” I disagree. Receiving Inspection should be performed using the same cure cycle that the parts will be made with. In practice it won’t work at our facility to have a separate cure cycle just for receiving inspection. Section 3.3 recommends “that the end-user perform the purchaser batch acceptance tests on panels cured using the material supplier’s baseline cure process.” I disagree. Receiving Inspection should be performed using the same cure cycle that the parts will be made with. In practice it won’t work at our facility to have a separate cure cycle just for receiving inspection.

9. 9/17/2003 9LRM Spec Review Material Specification, Qualification Requirements Section 4.2 recommends a check for maximum Tg. Is this really something to check? Section 4.2 recommends a check for maximum Tg. Is this really something to check? Section 4.3 Item 1 says the material equivalency and batch acceptance requirements should be recalculated and the specification updated. I think it should specifically say in this step that the B-Basis design values are NOT changed. Section 4.3 Item 1 says the material equivalency and batch acceptance requirements should be recalculated and the specification updated. I think it should specifically say in this step that the B-Basis design values are NOT changed.

10. 9/17/2003 10LRM Spec Review Material Specification, Qualification Requirements Section 4.6.3 says Level 2 changes can be approved with less than the full equivalency test plan required for a Level 3 change. So what is required? Section 4.6.3 says Level 2 changes can be approved with less than the full equivalency test plan required for a Level 3 change. So what is required? Section 4.6.4 says that a full equivalency test program is required per AR-03/19 for a Level 3 change. I haven’t seen this document, but if it is the same as AR-00/47, it requires one batch with 8 replicates for strength and 4 for modulus. Section 4.6.4 further states that “Testing to validate Level 3 changes should involve a minimum of three batches…” Appears to be in conflict. Section 4.6.4 says that a full equivalency test program is required per AR-03/19 for a Level 3 change. I haven’t seen this document, but if it is the same as AR-00/47, it requires one batch with 8 replicates for strength and 4 for modulus. Section 4.6.4 further states that “Testing to validate Level 3 changes should involve a minimum of three batches…” Appears to be in conflict.

11. 9/17/2003 11LRM Spec Review Material Specification, Resin Procurement Section 6.3.2 says “None of the tests in Table 1 are recommended for batch acceptance testing” yet the footnote on Table 1 identifies some tasks as ‘acceptance tests.’ Section 6.3.2 says “None of the tests in Table 1 are recommended for batch acceptance testing” yet the footnote on Table 1 identifies some tasks as ‘acceptance tests.’ Table 2 recommends cured resin tension test. Wouldn’t compression be more relevant? Table 2 recommends cured resin tension test. Wouldn’t compression be more relevant? Section 6.3.5 is the PCD for resins, yet it includes references to fabric. Section 6.3.5 is the PCD for resins, yet it includes references to fabric.

12. 9/17/2003 12LRM Spec Review Material Specification, Resin Procurement Section 6.4.2.4 ( typo, listed as 6.4.3.4) says that replacement data is only allowed if (1) test abnormality, (2) statistical outlier, and (3) bad specimen prep or conditioning. I believe that should be or. Section 6.4.2.4 ( typo, listed as 6.4.3.4) says that replacement data is only allowed if (1) test abnormality, (2) statistical outlier, and (3) bad specimen prep or conditioning. I believe that should be or. Retest section should be specifically identified as pertaining to both supplier and part producer testing. Retest section should be specifically identified as pertaining to both supplier and part producer testing. Paragraph three references prepreg Paragraph three references prepreg

13. 9/17/2003 13LRM Spec Review Material Specification, Resin Procurement Section 6.4.3 requires two copies of certs. Why? Section 6.4.3 requires two copies of certs. Why? Section 6.4.5 says the specification should define the requirements for certifying a test lab. I don’t think that should go in each material specification. Belongs in a separate guidance document, or nowhere. Test lab certification is left to the Quality Department at Lancair, just like any other vender approval (no type design requirements). Section 6.4.5 says the specification should define the requirements for certifying a test lab. I don’t think that should go in each material specification. Belongs in a separate guidance document, or nowhere. Test lab certification is left to the Quality Department at Lancair, just like any other vender approval (no type design requirements).

14. 9/17/2003 14LRM Spec Review Material Specification, Resin Procurement Section 6.7 says that batches rejected by a purchaser should not be rerouted to other purchasers. We should allow a way for the material supplier to sell to a different customer with different requirements (e.g. sports industry). Can this be reworded? Section 6.7 says that batches rejected by a purchaser should not be rerouted to other purchasers. We should allow a way for the material supplier to sell to a different customer with different requirements (e.g. sports industry). Can this be reworded?

15. 9/17/2003 15LRM Spec Review Material Specification, Fabric Procurement Section 7.1 discusses ‘cure conditions.’ Is this applicable to fabrics? Section 7.1 discusses ‘cure conditions.’ Is this applicable to fabrics? Section 7.3.3 is the PCD for fabric, but discusses resin. Section 7.3.3 is the PCD for fabric, but discusses resin. Section 7.4.2.2 references cured and uncured materials Section 7.4.2.2 references cured and uncured materials

16. 9/17/2003 16LRM Spec Review Material Specification, Cured Material Acceptance Table 6 may be easier to understand if it were broken into three tables that corresponded to text descriptions of (1) IMQ testing (2) Receiving Inspection testing and (3) Database Enhancement testing, with frequencies given for each. Table 6 may be easier to understand if it were broken into three tables that corresponded to text descriptions of (1) IMQ testing (2) Receiving Inspection testing and (3) Database Enhancement testing, with frequencies given for each. Section 8.3.4.4 should perhaps reference foam instead of honeycomb core. Mentions prepreg. (recommend search and replace) Section 8.3.4.4 should perhaps reference foam instead of honeycomb core. Mentions prepreg. (recommend search and replace)

17. 9/17/2003 17LRM Spec Review Material Specification, Cured Material Acceptance Should the laminate tests include planned variations in cure cycle, resin content, and hardener content? Should the laminate tests include planned variations in cure cycle, resin content, and hardener content? As shown in Figure 4, was it considered to forego performing the Batch Acceptance (receiving) tests and instead perform only the Batch Release Tests? As shown in Figure 4, was it considered to forego performing the Batch Acceptance (receiving) tests and instead perform only the Batch Release Tests? Goal should be for it to be the responsibility of the supplier to provide a good product and prove it. (i.e. not the responsibility of the end-user to ensure they received good material) Responsibility of the end-user to provide a good part and prove it. Goal should be for it to be the responsibility of the supplier to provide a good product and prove it. (i.e. not the responsibility of the end-user to ensure they received good material) Responsibility of the end-user to provide a good part and prove it.

18. 9/17/2003 18LRM Spec Review Material Specification, Cured Material Acceptance Section 8.4.2.2, Constituent Receiving Inspection Tests, copies the material procurement spec. Does it belong here? Section 8.4.2.2, Constituent Receiving Inspection Tests, copies the material procurement spec. Does it belong here? Section 8.4.2.4, Part Acceptance Tests, recommends only performing a test on excess resin to validate proper cure, when the materials have batch release testing prior to use. What kind of test should that be? Section 8.4.2.4, Part Acceptance Tests, recommends only performing a test on excess resin to validate proper cure, when the materials have batch release testing prior to use. What kind of test should that be? 8.4.2.5, Retest, says to inform end-users of a material batch for which retests were performed. Is this applicable to the material acceptance spec? 8.4.2.5, Retest, says to inform end-users of a material batch for which retests were performed. Is this applicable to the material acceptance spec?

19. 9/17/2003 19LRM Spec Review Process Specification Should Section 2.3 on Materials be included, or just reference the material specification? Should Section 2.3 on Materials be included, or just reference the material specification? Bagging materials should be controlled in some manner, perhaps in Section 2.4 Bagging materials should be controlled in some manner, perhaps in Section 2.4 Section 2.7.1 says that at least two thermocouples should be used for each panel. Perhaps more useful to define a ratio for number of thermocouples to panel area. Section 2.7.1 says that at least two thermocouples should be used for each panel. Perhaps more useful to define a ratio for number of thermocouples to panel area.

20. 9/17/2003 20LRM Spec Review Process Specification I recommend Section 2.8.2, Inspection and Process Monitoring, references the material specification or the material specification references this one rather than put in both places. I recommend Section 2.8.2, Inspection and Process Monitoring, references the material specification or the material specification references this one rather than put in both places. Section 2.8.3, Panel Inspection, includes a check on panel thickness. Is this unique to LRM or also in prepreg? If values are normalized by ply thickness, is this necessary? Section 2.8.3, Panel Inspection, includes a check on panel thickness. Is this unique to LRM or also in prepreg? If values are normalized by ply thickness, is this necessary?

21. 9/17/2003 21LRM Spec Review Recommendations Table of standard tolerances Table of standard tolerances Flammability Testing Flammability Testing Effects of lightning mesh (included in the samples or not) Effects of lightning mesh (included in the samples or not) For us, Environmental/Variability Factors are a big part of what we get out of laminate tests. Can that be discussed in this document? For us, Environmental/Variability Factors are a big part of what we get out of laminate tests. Can that be discussed in this document? E/V Factor = Mean Strength at Test Environment B-Basis Strength at HW B-Basis Strength at HW